A question about MS67 Merc Dimes and who grades them better.

Fairlaneman

The dates I am interested in are the ones in the 1940's.

Who do you think grades them better PCGS or NGC ? Untill a few months ago,about nine, I would not even consider buying a MS67 slabbed Merc. Now after getting a few of them in both PCGS and NGC slabs I think I have a opinion on who does a better job of grading these or maybe a better statement would be slabbing these.

I'll reveal what I think after some replys come in if any do.

Thanks.
Ken

CarlWohlforth

I had two runs of 1940s MS 67 FB Mercs, one PCGS and the other NGC. The PCGS coins had fewer ticks. They are now all sold. The NGC coins had more ticks. I still have them.

cherrypickincoin

Ken,

I'm a big Mercury Dime collector myself. This is a very tough call. I have many Merc's in PCGS and NGC slabs. Most of my blast white Merc's are in PCGS slabs and most of my eye popping, toned ones are in NGC slabs so it's really difficult for me to give an answer without being biased. It's a tough battle, either way.

jom

<< <i>Who do you think grades them better PCGS or NGC ? >>



Please define "better".

jom

coiNuts

I agree that both services are close, but PCGS seems to be a bit pickier with the contact marks, and NGC seems to give a bump for nice color.........I think the coin itself decides whom it should go to..........

Cam40

lol `better` huh. hehe

hmm couldnt one say ACG would grade them `better` than PCGS or NGC......that only means they are
willing to overgrade a coin to ridiculous extremes.

what is better though. more accurately?

whos call is it though to say what is `more accurate`.PCGS`s standards or NGC standards.

Like grading coins itself,isnt it all a matter of ones own opinion who grades what series the most accurate?

I,d say PCGS would grade a coin 66 and the same coin at NGC would be a 67.
Now whos grade is `better` or more accurate.

flip a coin.

wingedliberty

Ken:
There is no doubt that PCGS is the strictest with 67 Mercs. NGC is much looser on Mercs in 67 and the series in general. I will give NGC alot of credit for being more objective on grading toned examples. PCGs is also without out a doubt the toughest on full split band criteria. I have seen many borderline full bands that were designated as FB in NGC holders, but very few borderline FBs in PCGS holders that were marked as FB.

ANACS,PCI, and ICG are all about equal on Mercs. SEGS,NTC, and ACG are ofcourse a joke. I have seen 50% full band examples adundant in NTC and ACG holders designated with full bands.


Best wishes,
Brian.

Fairlaneman

Jom I was trying to ask the question without giving away the thoughts I have on the coins. I suppose contact marks, eye appeal and the overall appearance of the coin, both obverse and reverse, would come into play on the grade. Originality fits right in also.

It has been said that the two services have different standards when it comes to grading some series of coins but is there such a thing as a different standard at this level of preservation ?

Ken

CarlWohlforth

You can see some hits on the facses on this dime. There are some smaller ones on the obverse. This one is graded 68 by NGC.

fcloud

PCGS has a bit higher standards on tics. NGC has higher standard on FB.

jeffnpcb

ACG or TRUGRADE!!!

JRocco

I would rather hold a 67 Merc in a PCGS holder.

jom

Fairlane: I understand what you are trying to do but if you ask what standard is "better" you really need to define that. It can be several things:

1) More strict, meaning it is harder to get a higher grade.

2) Consistancy or to be more clear, how consistant is the service in implementing their standard.

To me, consistancy is FAR more important than how strict because when a service is consistant you know what you are going to get. How strict a service is only means that the service is grades tougher. To me, consistancy is the key because a grader can be strict but inconsistant with that "strictness", if you know what I mean.

When I collected Mercs, which was for about 6 years from 1993 to about 1999, this is what I observed. Neither service was "terrific" in their consistancy but NGC was better in this regard. You knew when looking at the coin that NGC would grade it a certain way. If it had color you could pretty much guess it would get a bump in grade even if the luster was lacking. PCGS was definately more strict and there would certainly be more white coins in PCGS holders. As far as the FB's, I never saw anything that would tell me either service was more strict with their standard but both were consistant here since it is pretty difficult NOT to get the FB designation correct.

jom

Fairlaneman

I could have used a word in the title something other than better but what was wanted was your opinions about how the two services grade these dates so the vague term better was used.

The responses here have pretty much echoed what has been noticed in the brief time these coins have been bought by myself. When buying the coins slabbed by NGC in the grades lower than MS67 I believe PCGS does have the upper hand slightly IMO.

When you get to the MS67 grade it seems, and this is just my opinion, that the two services are equal with maybe NGC getting just a little bump ahead of PCGS in the eye appeal portion of the equation. While viewing the same dates side by side in thier respective coffins technically the coins look exactly the same. Luster wise neither service lets you down here either. Originality seems to be a item that both services keep a strict eye on also but as we all know sometimes a higher grade coin in its original un-tampered state is just not very pretty in the eye appeal department. So far a couple of the coins purchased in PCGS holders in the 67 grade lack the real eye appeal that I like to see. All of the NGC coins do have the eye appeal so this is the reason the nod has been given to NGC when 1940's Merc Dimes are purchased in the MS67 grade.

Thanks for your responses as they have confirmed pretty much what has observed by myself.

Ken